Selection of public managers and fixed-term contracts: the legitimacy of exclusions in Judgment no. 27192/2025

The subject of recruitment and career progression within the Public Administration has always been a field of intense legal debate. Recently, the Court of Cassation ruled on a matter of great significance concerning the distinction between tenured managers and managers hired under fixed-term contracts, outlining precise boundaries to protect the administrative organization of the State. With judgment no. 27192 of October 10, 2025, the Supreme Court addressed the legitimacy of excluding fixed-term managers from selection procedures for the conferral of first-tier executive positions.

The case and the relevant legislation

The matter originates from the appeal filed by S., assisted by lawyer C. G., against the I. (defended by the State Attorney General's Office), following his exclusion from a selection procedure reserved exclusively for tenured managers. The appellant, hired under a fixed-term contract pursuant to Article 19, paragraph 6, of Legislative Decree no. 165 of 2001, complained of disparate treatment compared to his permanent colleagues, deeming it contrary to European principles of non-discrimination.

The cornerstone legislation around which the dispute revolves is precisely Art. 19, paragraph 6, of Legislative Decree 165/2001, which governs the conferral of executive assignments to external or internal non-tenured subjects, within precise percentage and temporal limits. Regarding the European context, the defense invoked Clause 4 of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work, annexed to Directive 1999/70/EC, which prohibits less favorable treatment for fixed-term workers unless objective reasons exist.

The decision of the Court of Cassation and the legal principle

The judges of the Court of Cassation rejected the appellant's argument, confirming the decision of the Rome Court of Appeal. The Court clarified that the difference in treatment is justified by the lack of homogeneity between the employment positions in question. The following is the official legal principle (Massima) expressed by the judges:

Regarding management in privatized public employment, the selection for the conferral of a first-tier executive position reserved only for tenured managers - and to which, therefore, managers appointed pursuant to Art. 19, paragraph 6, of Legislative Decree no. 165 of 2001 are not admitted - is legitimate and does not conflict with Clause 4 of the Framework Agreement annexed to Directive 1999/70/EC, given the lack of homogeneity between the two positions, as the fixed-term manager, unlike the permanent one, is not stably integrated into the organization of the entity.

This ruling consolidates a rigorous jurisprudential orientation. The focal point lies in the concept of stable integration into the organization of the public entity. While the tenured manager (permanent) is part of the permanent structure of the Public Administration, ensuring the continuity of administrative action, the fixed-term manager addresses temporary and extraordinary needs.

Why is there no discrimination according to European law?

The Court of Cassation explained that Directive 1999/70/EC does not impose total equalization between stable and precarious employment relationships where objective elements of differentiation exist. The differences found between the two figures can be summarized as follows:

• Access methods: the tenured manager gains access through a public competition aimed at stability, whereas the assignment under Art. 19, paragraph 6, responds to fiduciary and temporary criteria;
• Organizational integration: only the permanent manager ensures the structural and institutional continuity necessary for first-tier roles;
• Nature of the relationship: the intrinsic temporariness of the fixed-term contract prevents the maturation of an automatic expectation for career progression reserved for organic roles.

Conclusions

With judgment no. 27192/2025, the Supreme Court reaffirms the legitimacy of the organizational choices of the Public Administration, provided they are consistent with the national and European regulatory framework. The exclusion of contract managers from top-level selections does not constitute prohibited discrimination, but rather a consistent application of the principle of good performance of the Public Administration, which requires stable and structured management for the administration of top-level functions.